[Robin_Hiseman]

Ben


That's an interesting point you raise about the EIGCA vetting products, although perhaps more a question for the STRI or USGA Greens Section, who have laboratories for such things. Still, you are a Candidate for Membership of the EIGCA and it would be perfectly valid for you to raise your concerns to the appropriate committee, and perhaps directly to Jonathan Gaunt, the architect who has specified this method for Cavendish. FYI, Richard Allen (EcoBunker) is a Bronze Patron of the EIGCA.

[Ben Stephens]

Ben


That's an interesting point you raise about the EIGCA vetting products, although perhaps more a question for the STRI or USGA Greens Section, who have laboratories for such things. Still, you are a Candidate for Membership of the EIGCA and it would be perfectly valid for you to raise your concerns to the appropriate committee, and perhaps directly to Jonathan Gaunt, the architect who has specified this method for Cavendish. FYI, Richard Allen (EcoBunker) is a Bronze Patron of the EIGCA.

Robin,


There are lots of questions about materials vetting process in the construction industry in the UK at present because two major insulation companies have misled everyone about their products. I suspect the vetting process in near future will be more stringent.


I guess I will have to find out how close EIGCA are with STRI. There will be more new materials coming through at a more accelerated rate in future even for golf courses such as the hybrid system used on football pitches would that transpire to golf courses?


Callaway are already testing graphene in golf balls. Maybe it would not be long til we use graphene as bunker liners and water can still percolate through it however is it safe in relation to soils and natural environment. Graphene is also being used as a water filter which gets the salt out of sea water


Cheers
Ben

[Tony_Muldoon]

Ben


Can you point to evidence of plastic affecting the "natural" properties of soil?
Over 30 years in a tangential industry I never got a whisper of this. 
Golf courses have drainage and irrigation pipes/sprinklers and the soft paths, signage etc already.  I looked quite seriously at jumping onto the Astroturf in gardens bandwagon maybe 20 years ago. None of my research suggested this (in the end we didn't want to get involved with the domestic market) and its been installed by a lot of people with shrubbeds surroundingit.. My local parks have Astroturf cricket wickets with no apparent problems surrounding them.
We cant have it both ways. An innert material that "poisons" (too strong?) The soil around it? I'm having trouble understanding that idea.

[Duncan Cheslett]

Ben,


The cart paths at Silloth (and countless other courses) are made from reused astroturf.


I’ve never noticed any deterioration in the quality of the surrounding sward whatsoever.


As for combustibility, that’s just bonkers! 🤣

[Ben Stephens]

Ben


Can you point to evidence of plastic affecting the "natural" properties of soil?
Over 30 years in a tangential industry I never got a whisper of this. 
Golf courses have drainage and irrigation pipes/sprinklers and the soft paths, signage etc already.  I looked quite seriously at jumping onto the Astroturf in gardens bandwagon maybe 20 years ago. None of my research suggested this (in the end we didn't want to get involved with the domestic market) and its been installed by a lot of people with shrubbeds surroundingit.. My local parks have Astroturf cricket wickets with no apparent problems surrounding them.
We cant have it both ways. An innert material that "poisons" (too strong?) The soil around it? I'm having trouble understanding that idea.

Hi Tony,

There have been light plastic liners used many time as bunker liners and in planting - this is different to the astroturf variations IMO as the astroturf are much thicker and heavier plus has more plastic which is more granular in structure. Eco bunker also use cement backing to keep the revetted parts intact not sure whether they use a similar material to line the base of the bunker. The do improve the drainage generally but these materials and drainage do have an effect on the soil nutrients as they are alien material and the area is dried up more quickly.

I have not seen astroturf being used as a bunker liner but I am concerned because its not very good for the environment and feel that 'Eco bunker' as a product is a misnomer. Has the company got any proof that it does not affect the surrounds where a large section of astroturf lining is used?

The only example of astroturf affecting soil content and moisture I can think of is when I played cricket for a village club and the square we played on in that match was right next to the astroturf strip with a shallow concrete base. The pitch on that square we played on was horrendous and I asked my colleague who was the clubs groundsman he said the soil content and moisture was affected by being next to the astroturf which led to it having huge cracks probably the biggest i have seen playing cricket and it was rather dangerous that I resorted to wearing a helmet which i very rarely wore whilst batting - the opposition said they watered it in the morning prior to the game on a rather warm day. The grass pitches next to it further away from the astroturf strip either side was much better. My colleague said to me thats why 'I don't have this at our place'

So my question for you - did you actually look up closely the astroturf section with a concrete base and the two grass pitches either side on the cricket square in summer?. Cricket pitches often look good from a distance however it is different when you closely look at them.

An excerpt from https://biofriendlyplanet.com/green-ideas/eco-friendly/just-eco-friendly-artificial-grass/ - "It takes thousands of years for topsoil to develop but it can easily be lost through erosion, either by wind or water. Natural grass helps significantly in preventing this from happening. That’s because real grass sends many fine rootlets into crevices of the soil where they grow and, as they decay, add organic matter to the soil.Unfortunately, it is recommended the soil be heavily compacted and leveled before any synthetic grass is installed. This process damages the structure of the soil and kills soil microbes. It can also potentially damage the roots of trees within the area'.

Bunkers are quite a large area and small plastic microbes filtering out of the granular structure from the astroturf will breach through the soil damaging a healthy area of soil in the long term.
So for me it is a case of wait and see what effect this approach used at Cavendish has over the long term. Maybe we will find out at BUDA next year whether it has an effect on it or not. also it would be interesting to know whether an agronomist has been involved as well?
I just feel that too many are jumping on the Ecobunker bandwagon without vetting or testing and understanding the materials - the pros and cons/possible effects etc. I do try and encourage avoiding using plastic where I can in both architecture and Golf course design. Plastic is basically destroying most of the planet.
Cheers Ben

[Ben Stephens]

Ben,


The cart paths at Silloth (and countless other courses) are made from reused astroturf.


I’ve never noticed any deterioration in the quality of the surrounding sward whatsoever.


As for combustibility, that’s just bonkers! 🤣

Maybe you are not looking closely enough and suggest you take a magnifying glass next time   compare it with the grasses further away from the path.

Not sure if you are aware plastic is made from petroleum    astroturf is a thermoplastic (oil based) and has fire retardant added to it however it doesn't prevent it from melting. I wonder if the company used at Cavendish actually do rigorous testing on their 'reused' astroturf materials and not all of them will be the same and likely to have inconsistent properties - some astroturf are well built and others poorly built depending on where they are sourced from.

Most astroturf manufacturers advise customers to keep barbecues, cigarettes and motorised machinery away from it


Don't take advice from an assumed expert or salesmen. I would ask them hard questions and ask others who have expertise or knowledge regarding plastics.



Thermoplastics are prevalent on roads and on very hot days they become spongey.   

There are different requirements for astroturf indoors and outdoors. I worked for a practice that had a client a very well known major furniture retailer and their head office had astroturf flooring in some areas of it - the astroturf internally had to have a much higher fire rating than one that is used outdoors which has a lower fire rating. So the ones used at Cavendish will likely to have a lower fire rating. It is not 100% sure fire protected. 

[Duncan Cheslett]

Ben,


Should we replace the wooden benches we have at most tees? The wooden tee blocks?


What about the wooden furniture on the terrace outside the clubhouse?


Trees don’t come with a fire certificate. Technically they can burn - we’ve all seen the images of forest fires on the telly. I’ve heard lots of good reasons for felling trees on golf courses but being a fire hazard is a new one on me.

 

[Ben Stephens]

Ben,


Should we replace the wooden benches we have at most tees? The wooden tee blocks?


What about the wooden furniture on the terrace outside the clubhouse?


Trees don’t come with a fire certificate. Technically they can burn - we’ve all seen the images of forest fires on the telly. I’ve heard lots of good reasons for felling trees on golf courses but being a fire hazard is a new one on me.

 

Duncan




Umm - I did not make any reference to timber or trees??




Most materials do catch fire its what is released into the atmosphere is key.


The difference is that trees/timber are natural and plastic isn't.


Plastic releases more harmful toxins and can be damaging to the natural environment over time.


Wood is biodegradable. Most plastics aren't. Plastics are recommended to be buried in fill rather than burned. 


Fire retardant wood does not melt. Fire retardant plastic does.


Wood burns at a slower pace. Plastic burns at a more rapid pace.


The natural environment of this planet is being destroyed by plastics. Timber does not do so.


Reused plastic is not an eco product. Timber is


Timber is carbon neutral. Plastic isn't.


Plastic is harmful to the local animals. timber isn't




My biggest concern is that this product has not been properly vetted and tested for use on golf courses. It is potentially more harmful than most think it is and a lot of people /clubs have jumped on the bandwagon thinking it is a wonderful solution without a proper risk assessment.


 

[Ally Mcintosh]

In fairness, Ben has a point.


Plastic bunkers are environmentally friendly in that they - in theory - require less maintenance, less machinery, less manpower, less stripping of natural turf etc... So there’s a return on investment and economic sustainability.


But the materials are certainly not environmentally friendly.


Perhaps the question is what would have happened to that used astroturf had it not been used for bunker building? Is the use of artificial turf in bunkers leading to an aggregate increase in the production of artificial turf?

[Robin_Hiseman]

Ally


It would go in a landfill.


I contacted Richard Allen of EcoBunker and he kindly provided a response to Ben's charges. See below.


Ben, I'm curious to know if you ever refused, on a point of principle, to play hockey on an artificial pitch?


Over and out.

Fire risk- we did actually test it at the start and tried to set it on fire with naked flames. There was some scorching and localised melting but the material doesn’t continue to burn after the source flame is removed. It would take a very determined prolonged act of vandalism to cause noticeable damage. In other words, unless you drench it with an accelerant like petrol , you can’t set it on fire and leave it burn. Regarding the ecobunker walls, the same comment- but this time we can point to literally thousands of bunkers worldwide over the last 10 years and not one single report of fire. (A cheeky point perhaps- i’d say with a fair degree of certainty that peat-rich natural revetting turf , during a hot dry summer would be far more at risk of burning- a golf course i was a member of, with a high peat content underneath actually had a ban on smoking in 1983 because the 13th fairway was smouldering all summer, with worries about the rest of the course going up in flames too- true story)

 Is it recycled or reused? A debatable point, and perhaps not that important, but we do carry out careful reprocessing. We calculated the weight of the material, and cut it into sizes that can be installed by hand , negating the need to use heavy lifting apparatus. We also developed a jointing technique and we are very selective on the type of artificial turf that’s used for lining (we use 1st generation needlepunch turf) which has a very high density of fibres - much more dense than more commonly used 2nd generation sand fill - which is the usual type for hockey pitches. It would take a really determined , deliberate effort to cause any damage to it...

[Ally Mcintosh]

Well, I guess if it all goes in to landfill, it is not adding to the production of artificial turf and it does not add to transport or manufacturing, then the point that I thought Ben might have had no longer stands up.

[Ben Stephens]

Ally


It would go in a landfill.


I contacted Richard Allen of EcoBunker and he kindly provided a response to Ben's charges. See below.


Ben, I'm curious to know if you ever refused, on a point of principle, to play hockey on an artificial pitch?


Over and out.

Fire risk- we did actually test it at the start and tried to set it on fire with naked flames. There was some scorching and localised melting but the material doesn’t continue to burn after the source flame is removed. It would take a very determined prolonged act of vandalism to cause noticeable damage. In other words, unless you drench it with an accelerant like petrol , you can’t set it on fire and leave it burn. Regarding the ecobunker walls, the same comment- but this time we can point to literally thousands of bunkers worldwide over the last 10 years and not one single report of fire. (A cheeky point perhaps- i’d say with a fair degree of certainty that peat-rich natural revetting turf , during a hot dry summer would be far more at risk of burning- a golf course i was a member of, with a high peat content underneath actually had a ban on smoking in 1983 because the 13th fairway was smouldering all summer, with worries about the rest of the course going up in flames too- true story)

 Is it recycled or reused? A debatable point, and perhaps not that important, but we do carry out careful reprocessing. We calculated the weight of the material, and cut it into sizes that can be installed by hand , negating the need to use heavy lifting apparatus. We also developed a jointing technique and we are very selective on the type of artificial turf that’s used for lining (we use 1st generation needlepunch turf) which has a very high density of fibres - much more dense than more commonly used 2nd generation sand fill - which is the usual type for hockey pitches. It would take a really determined , deliberate effort to cause any damage to it...

Robin,


Was these fire tests done by an independent expert? The fire rating for outdoor astroturf (Rating E or higher) is a lot less than for use indoors (Rating B or higher). 


More hockey pitches at top level are becoming waterbased rather than sand based.


Hockey pitches are not really built out in the countryside where there is an natural environment like golf courses. Old and reused surfaces are more likely to be cut open which exposes plastic particles to filtrate through the soil.


Cheers
Ben


 

[Niall C]

Ally

I thought you made a good point with your first post when you asked "Is the use of artificial turf in bunkers leading to an aggregate increase in the production of artificial turf?" At the moment presumably the amount of second hand astro-turf outstrips demand for Eco bunkers but what happens when it really takes off and the demand for Eco bunkers outstrips the amount of recycled material available ? Simple economics and business sense suggest that new material will be created which kind of negates one of the benefits of this system.

Niall

[Duncan Cheslett]

Niall,


I think we’ve got a way to go before the demand for Ecobunker material outstrips the supply of old Astroturf.


The amount of material in the stacked edge of a typical Ecobunker is minimal. Even a fully revetted links style bunker such as the ones at my other club Silloth don’t actually contain that much material.


The recent development of using the reused artificial turf as a liner clearly increases demand, but compared to its use as a surface for cart paths the quantities involved are doubtless still small.


I don’t have any interest in Ecobunker other than being a member of two golf clubs which  have invested heavily into the construction method. I guess that gives me reason enough to hope that it is successful. My gut feeling is that reusing the material rather than sending it to landfill has got to be a good thing.


Does it fit in with a classic golden age course? Why not?


MacKenzie didn’t use artificial turf to construct his bunkers. He didn’t use bulldozers on his early courses either - because he didn’t have them at his disposal.


If bulldozers and the Ecobunker system had been available would he have used them?


My guess is that he possibly would.

[Ben Stephens]

Well, I guess if it all goes in to landfill, it is not adding to the production of artificial turf and it does not add to transport or manufacturing, then the point that I thought Ben might have had no longer stands up.

This to me is prioritising 'making a quick buck' and reusing a material bought cheaply that could still have an impact on the natural local soil and animal environment that may not be repaired for 100, 1000 years or so.


Surely there are other ways to reuse astroturf. Some parts of the astroturf is rubber which is much more eco friendly than plastic. Rubber could be extracted/separated from harmful elements and recycled whereas the plastic parts of the astroturf ideally would be recycled for uses other than using it in natural environs. Throwing it on landfill is cutting corners and pure laziness.   


99.9 percent of the human race would take the easy option in this instance which is more financially driven in the long term.


For me as much i love the course for me Cavendish is no longer a 'natural' golf course due to toxic/alien materials used on the course in large numbers.

[Thomas Dai]

Green side 'up' or green side 'down'? (sic)

atb

[Duncan Cheslett]

Ben,


Using words like “toxic” on a public forum to describe a company’s product is unwise and could prove expensive.


I advise caution.

[Ben Stephens]

Ben,


Using words like “toxic” on a public forum to describe a company’s product is unwise and could prove expensive.


I advise caution.

Why?? Its not their actual product isn't it? this is a reused product made by another company which they chose to extract/buy and when it melts it does releases toxic materials so therefore it is 'toxic' which is a risk. They should put in an advisory notice to all customers regarding this as they can be liable for this if the toxic elements are released.

Both your clubs have made that choice to use those materials and they should add caution IMO.



 

[Duncan Cheslett]

Hopefully we can get back on topic.


The new bunkers on holes 1,2 and 3 have now been turfed and await their sand.


Hole 1 from 140 yards out.


IMG_5048 by Duncan Cheslett, on Flickr


The two fairway bunkers on Hole 2 were originally slated to be grassed over, but member resistance led to a reprieve. While the contractors were on site they did a quick facelift job on them.

IMG_5053 by Duncan Cheslett, on Flickr

The 285 yard 3rd hole now looks as if it is surrounded by bunkers and that the green must be flown if it is to be reached from the tee.

IMG_5050 by Duncan Cheslett, on Flickr

A slight change of angle however, reveals that there is still a generous route in to the right of the line of front bunkers. It will be a brave shot in summer conditions, though!

IMG_5055 by Duncan Cheslett, on Flickr

Overall, I feel the restyled bunkers will hugely improve the first three holes, commonly thought to be the dullest section of the course. The 3rd in particular will be elevated to one of Cavendish's very best holes, and one of the classic driveable par 4s in English golf with its notoriously treacherous fall-away green. If you get even slightly out of position it is possibly the hardest stroke 18 hole you will ever play!

[James Boon]

Duncan,


Thanks for these and thanks also for bringing us back on topic!


Are you sure this post isnt just an opportunity to show a great approach to the 1st green? 


The photo of the bunkers on the 2nd looks like the existing fairway bunkers? I thought the plan was to grass those over and put a new bunker further up or have plans changed? Are you able to post details of the Masterplan?


There also appear to be channels coming away from the bunkers which I assume are drainage? We all know drainage is a key part of good architecture, but its not an area I know much about, so the opportunity to discuss a specific example I'm familiar with is not to be missed! If that is drainage, are they connected to an existing drain there, a soakaway of some sorts, or do they just drain away naturally after that? Just curious and while I suspect its not your area of expertise either Duncan    I hope one of architects could let me know?


I really like the look of the back right bunker on the 3rd and hope that more of the back bunkers that look so wonderful in the old photos can be reinstated.


Please continue to keep us informed on progress.


Cheers,


James

[Duncan Cheslett]

Duncan,


Thanks for these and thanks also for bringing us back on topic!


Are you sure this post isnt just an opportunity to show a great approach to the 1st green? 


The photo of the bunkers on the 2nd looks like the existing fairway bunkers? I thought the plan was to grass those over and put a new bunker further up or have plans changed? Are you able to post details of the Masterplan?


There also appear to be channels coming away from the bunkers which I assume are drainage? We all know drainage is a key part of good architecture, but its not an area I know much about, so the opportunity to discuss a specific example I'm familiar with is not to be missed! If that is drainage, are they connected to an existing drain there, a soakaway of some sorts, or do they just drain away naturally after that? Just curious and while I suspect its not your area of expertise either Duncan    I hope one of architects could let me know?


I really like the look of the back right bunker on the 3rd and hope that more of the back bunkers that look so wonderful in the old photos can be reinstated.


Please continue to keep us informed on progress.


Cheers,


James

The viewpoint for the pic of the 1st wasn't from where I placed my tee shot! I went back out after my round today to take the photos and this was to recreate the "before" pic posted earlier in this thread.


1 by Duncan Cheslett, on Flickr

I

Yes, the fairway bunkers on Hole 2 haven't been reshaped - they've merely had the drainage sorted out, been lined and re-edged. I'm not sure where the drain lines go to and you are quite right -  I know very little about drainage other than water flows downhill!

It was decided as a matter of policy not to build any new bunkers at this stage - we are conscious of the need to make our limited funds go as far as possible and not to be seen to be embarking on extravagant new developments so soon after staring financial oblivion in the face.

The back bunker on Hole 3 is a MacKenzie original which was grassed over many years ago. This is a reinstatement.

The bunker renewal programme is scheduled to take three years. It is certainly intended to reinstate other lost bunkers such as the iconic ones at the back of #14.

14 by Duncan Cheslett, on Flickr





Incidentally, the construction method on the new bunker edges turns out not to be stacked astroturf at all, but stacked natural turf. Astroturf has been used for the liners and for one layer around the edge. I had a really good poke round this afternoon and established this for myself.

[Neil White]

Duncan,


Looking at a GE image it would appear that there is a drain line or similar that runs across the front of the 3rd tees and then across the 2nd fairway toward the 1st fairway.  I would imagine the drains for the two fairway bunkers have been tapped into that.

[Duncan Cheslett]

Duncan,


Looking at a GE image it would appear that there is a drain line or similar that runs across the front of the 3rd tees and then across the 2nd fairway toward the 1st fairway.  I would imagine the drains for the two fairway bunkers have been tapped into that.

A reminder of how useful the dry summer of 2018 was in identifying lost drainage lines!

[Mark Pearce]

Ben,


Ice melts.  But its a long time since I saw a glacier on fire.

[James Boon]

Duncan,


Looking at a GE image it would appear that there is a drain line or similar that runs across the front of the 3rd tees and then across the 2nd fairway toward the 1st fairway.  I would imagine the drains for the two fairway bunkers have been tapped into that.

Thanks Neil, good observation!


Cheers,


James

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()